I have issues with Islam

[Woodrow LI]

I agree with most of what you said in your post, and Gulf money is certainly responsible for spreading a hateful version of Islam into places that were traditionally much more moderate and pluralistic. This has certainly caused problems at local levels in the developing world where minority communities who have lived in peace for centuries have become targets for attacks as well as contributing to Islamo-nationalist movements (groups with a localised and specific territorial goal).

It also contributes, to some extent, to the international terrorist problem, but this also draws heavily on people like Sayyid Qutb, whose radical Islamism bears a number of uncanny similarities to mid 20th C Western totalitarian ideologies, particularly Lenninism. A revolutionary vanguard seizing power to destroy the decadent and oppressive capitalist and hypocritical liberals and move people from a state of ignorance. After establishing sharia, there would eventually be little need for government as society would become enlightened and injustice would no longer exist.

The jihadi terrorist is a creation of modernity, and it only gained in popularity after the failure of Arab leftist movements in the 50s, 60s and 70s. However it has multiple analogues in many utopian and millenarian movements throughout history wether they be communist, Nazi, Mazdakist, anabaptist or whatever other ideology captured the particular zeitgeist when a society provided the correct breeding grounds for sufficiently widespread acceptance.

It is also worth noting that every significant terrorist group grew out of an ultimately nationalistic conflict.

Wahabbism/violent salfism is certainly a contributory factor, but it is far from the only one and arguably not the main one (if a 'main' cause can even be said to exist).

Just addressing the last sentence

Wahabbism/violent salfism is certainly a contributory factor, but it is far from the only one and arguably not the main one (if a 'main' cause can even be said to exist).

While I feel that Wahbbism is the main cause, there are really very many causes.
Some from western interference, mostly the establishment in establishing country boundries in a region that never had suc.
But there are also many internal factors much of it related to traditions, tribal culture and out right prejudice.

 

[Woodrow LI]

I agree with you. These upset me too and many others like us. Christianity has come out of the dark ages, but Islam is still residing there. we can speak out the errors or stupidities in Bible, (it might upset some), but nobody will demand a death sentence for this. On the other hand, if one question the ethics of Prophet Mohammed who raped a 9 year old girl (his wife Ayshaa whom he married at the age of 50 ! ), - situation would be much different - stoning to death, lashing ( 100 to 1000's), torturing - the possibilities are many.

Population of Muslims in the world in percentage = 23
contribution of terrorism by Muslims in the world = 95%.
So, person by person, a Muslim is over 65 times much more aggressive (which I believe is a sign of uncivilizedness as a religion) than an average non -Muslim.
I believe all gods that came through religion are fake and are man made. We can figure out countless stupidities in any religion.
What I believe is this - God speaks to us through our moral, our sense of being right. It is because of our higher moral codes that we disagree with terrorism and child marriages. And since Islam accept these and since that there is much more occurrence of terrorism among Islamic people, i have more reason to believe that Islam is Satan sent, not God sent. I only hope that they recognize this before their final judgment day.

It should be emphasized that nearly all of that terrorism is internal factors occurring within Islamic Nations.There are several groups highly intent on destroying Islam and doing all they can to end Islam. They may wear the name of Muslim, but they are enemies of Islam.

Nearly all violence committed in non-Muslim lands is seldom called "Terrorism" it is called "Criminal acts" and is carried out by non-Muslims.
Murder, Sexual assaults, drug crimes, robberies, thefts, gang activities etc are occurring in non-Muslim nations at an epidemic rate and that is the real danger the non-Muslim nations face.

Just my opinion but to me it appears much of the fear tactics about Islamic terrorism is actually an excuse for nations to curtail basic rights within the nations.
Speaking as an old man living in America, the rights we have lost in the last 50 years borders on being beyond comprehension, and it was all done in the name of "National Security"

 

[Godobeyer]

In thecommand CenterMosqueIslam


Textual in Arabic also
( التقية ()meaning --lie

WHat command you talking about ?

agan التقية mean "lie" ? or what ?

 

[Chev Chelios]

Hello again......
I am most saddened by yesterday's murders.......

No....... we would not let our media print cartoons like that here, certainly not without some action taking place against the media owners.

No...... we are not like France, or the French.
I hope that innocent Muslims everywhere will be protected.

What a pile of utterly abject capitualist pifle. If you consider your views, which are an utterly unacceptable impediment to democracy, as being what seperates us from France to be a good thing then, as an Englishman I say something I never before saw myself saying - VIVA LA FRANCE. Those cartoons absolutely should have been shown here and now more so than ever. Let it be an ear popping display of support for our superior values of liberty and freedom - let every Moslem on the planet be offended if they so choose to be - but a lesson simply must be administered in the name of absolute tolerance.

What I find even more deeply disheartening than your own cowardice, appeasement and legitimisation of these murderous zealots is that so much of the media would have the nerve to put on such a duplictious display today by, on the one hand denouncing this as an attack on freedom whilst at the same time self censoring themselves and refusing to show them - stunning. That you feel Islam should be afforded special treatment is abysmal and typifies how the West are allowing these Moslems to drive the agenda to suit their own odious agenda. Well, congratulations on supporting the Islamist worldview and giving your wholehearted backing to these barbarians in their quest to intimidate us into silence - be in no doubt that it is people like you who are handing the initiative over to them. They are winning.

Well, I for on will never surrender to these savages - compromsing my right to express myself freely is something I am simply not willing to give up to the followers of a faith that itself gives up absolutely nothing. Let this incident be the straw that broke the proverbial camels back and serve as a rallying call to all lovers of liberty to come out and fight for the freedom they want to take away from us (that can include Moslems if they want). I will not allow this religion to dictate what I can and can't say - I suggest others start acting out the freedoms these barbarians are so desperately trying to extinguish.

As for the hope that 'innocent Moslems' are protected - well, what on Earth does that mean? The much feared backlash against the Islamic diasporas that we are told will happen thankfully never does - something we cannot say in the Islamic world where reciprocal attacks on churches, synagogues etc typify the Moslem response to these events. It also is funny that you can have the nerve to say 'innocent' seeing as you have been so strongly arguing that there is something very shady about the continued silence of Moslems in the face of such atrocities - sort of not making them innocent really.

I have already pointed out that we didn't see Moslems gathering in unison yesterday (as they bloody well should have) but rather, it was non Moslems who did it (sorry, but I do not accept dubious, self serving statemenets from Islamic 'leaders'). I want to see Moslems show the courage of their convictions and the silence of the Islamic world tells us all we need to know about the views they hold - yet again.

 

[Augustus]

I have already pointed out that we didn't see Moslems gathering in unison yesterday (as they bloody well should have) but rather, it was non Moslems who did it (sorry, but I do not accept dubious, self serving statemenets from Islamic 'leaders'). I want to see Moslems show the courage of their convictions and the silence of the Islamic world tells us all we need to know about the views they hold - yet again.

Did you do a detailed analysis of the crowds to establish the ratio of Muslims to non-muslims? Or should Muslims have a special 'Muslim only' public penitence gathering?

You said you attended 1 anti-war rally, did you demonstrate every time 10 or 20 civilians were killed in Iraq? Were you out on the streets protesting the US torture report which your government was complicit in? Perhaps you protested each and every one of the Iraqi and Afghan civilians who were killed in British Army custody?

If there is a murder in London should all Londoners go out on the street just to show that not all Londoners are pro-murder? Maybe all black people should gather in unison every time someone is killed by the Crips? Maybe every time an unarmed black man is killed by a white American police officer white people everywhere should 'gather in unison'? Should we interpret all of these 'silences' as being indicative of the views they hold?

If someone says communists were atheist and they killed over 100 million people, most atheists would say so what? I'm not a communist, and their beliefs have nothing to do with mine. Communism is not atheism, i'm not responsible for that.

Why should anyone be held accountable for the actions of another person who just happens to share some part of their nominative identity?

Why should a normal Muslim have any greater obligation than anyone else to 'gather in unison'? And even if they did, you would probably consider them 'self serving' anyway...

You wouldn't accept being told to show contrition for every action carried out by people you feel no affinity with but share some arbitrary similarity to you. Why then should they do it just cos you 'want to see it'?

Your point is one of the most ridiculous and hypocritical arguments I can imagine.

 

[oldbadger]

What a pile of utterly abject capitualist pifle. If you consider your views, which are an utterly unacceptable impediment to democracy, as being what seperates us from France to be a good thing then, as an Englishman I say something I never before saw myself saying - VIVA LA FRANCE. Those cartoons absolutely should have been shown here and now more so than ever. Let it be an ear popping display of support for our superior values of liberty and freedom - let every Moslem on the planet be offended if they so choose to be - but a lesson simply must be administered in the name of absolute tolerance.

What I find even more deeply disheartening than your own cowardice, appeasement and legitimisation of these murderous zealots is that so much of the media would have the nerve to put on such a duplictious display today by, on the one hand denouncing this as an attack on freedom whilst at the same time self censoring themselves and refusing to show them - stunning. That you feel Islam should be afforded special treatment is abysmal and typifies how the West are allowing these Moslems to drive the agenda to suit their own odious agenda. Well, congratulations on supporting the Islamist worldview and giving your wholehearted backing to these barbarians in their quest to intimidate us into silence - be in no doubt that it is people like you who are handing the initiative over to them. They are winning.

Well, I for on will never surrender to these savages - compromsing my right to express myself freely is something I am simply not willing to give up to the followers of a faith that itself gives up absolutely nothing. Let this incident be the straw that broke the proverbial camels back and serve as a rallying call to all lovers of liberty to come out and fight for the freedom they want to take away from us (that can include Moslems if they want). I will not allow this religion to dictate what I can and can't say - I suggest others start acting out the freedoms these barbarians are so desperately trying to extinguish.

As for the hope that 'innocent Moslems' are protected - well, what on Earth does that mean? The much feared backlash against the Islamic diasporas that we are told will happen thankfully never does - something we cannot say in the Islamic world where reciprocal attacks on churches, synagogues etc typify the Moslem response to these events. It also is funny that you can have the nerve to say 'innocent' seeing as you have been so strongly arguing that there is something very shady about the continued silence of Moslems in the face of such atrocities - sort of not making them innocent really.

I have already pointed out that we didn't see Moslems gathering in unison yesterday (as they bloody well should have) but rather, it was non Moslems who did it (sorry, but I do not accept dubious, self serving statemenets from Islamic 'leaders'). I want to see Moslems show the courage of their convictions and the silence of the Islamic world tells us all we need to know about the views they hold - yet again.

On this, one of the saddest days of 2015, so far, at least I got to smile...... as I read your ranting post.

 

[Chev Chelios]

On this, one of the saddest days of 2015, so far, at least I got to smile...... as I read your ranting post.

And you stoop even lower still. To pretend that you are saddened by yesterday's events is sickening given that, by virtue of the fact you feel the cartoons shouldn't be shown here, means your masochistic stance on this oh so important issue makes an absolute mockery of what the now dead cartoonists stood and died for. But hey - I am so glad you can smile.

 

[oldbadger]

And you stoop even lower still. To pretend that you are saddened by yesterday's events is sickening given that, by virtue of the fact you feel the cartoons shouldn't be shown here, means your masochistic stance on this oh so important issue makes an absolute mockery of what the now dead cartoonists stood and died for. But hey - I am so glad you can smile.

Now........ leave your prejudice to one side and think.
1. Conspiracy to Terrorise and murder is dreadful and unacceptable.
Just digest that.
2. Stretching freedom of expression to deliberately upset minorities (that includes you, probably) is not decent.

See? Easy! But it's only easy if you are not prejudiced, and I think that you are.
Further, your posts are nasty and insulting.

 

[Chev Chelios]

Did you do a detailed analysis of the crowds to establish the ratio of Muslims to non-muslims? Or should Muslims have a special 'Muslim only' public penitence gathering?

You said you attended 1 anti-war rally, did you demonstrate every time 10 or 20 civilians were killed in Iraq? Were you out on the streets protesting the US torture report which your government was complicit in? Perhaps you protested each and every one of the Iraqi and Afghan civilians who were killed in British Army custody?

If there is a murder in London should all Londoners go out on the street just to show that not all Londoners are pro-murder? Maybe all black people should gather in unison every time someone is killed by the Crips? Maybe every time an unarmed black man is killed by a white American police officer white people everywhere should 'gather in unison'? Should we interpret all of these 'silences' as being indicative of the views they hold?

If someone says communists were atheist and they killed over 100 million people, most atheists would say so what? I'm not a communist, and their beliefs have nothing to do with mine. Communism is not atheism, i'm not responsible for that.

Why should anyone be held accountable for the actions of another person who just happens to share some part of their nominative identity?

Why should a normal Muslim have any greater obligation than anyone else to 'gather in unison'? And even if they did, you would probably consider them 'self serving' anyway...

You wouldn't accept being told to show contrition for every action carried out by people you feel no affinity with but share some arbitrary similarity to you. Why then should they do it just cos you 'want to see it'?

Your point is one of the most ridiculous and hypocritical arguments I can imagine.

Slight dissimulation indeed - an argument built on mere obsurantism. See, you have forgotten the all important binding factor in all of these tragic events - the religion of Islam. It is the culture born out of this faiths religious texts which shapes the environment which continually gives rise to these examples of Islamic slaughter. Is it not Islam's doctrine which espouses punishment to befall those who mock its prophet? This means of course that such frequent horrors are given complete legitimacy by this faiths theology - that is a severe problem unless said theology has been tamed by its adherents. But sadly blasphemy as a crime is a well established precept of Islam in 2015, it laughably still appears to cause great offence to the majority of Moslems and so given this and coupled with the fact that in 1400 years Moslems haven't overturned this dubious Islamic value means much blame can indeed be laid at their door.

Indeed, whilst I find it is odd that you draw parallels between a persons geographical place of birth to an ideology that people choose to follow, nevertheless saying a Londoner should protest against slaughter carried out by a Londoner only becomes equatable to the topic at hand IF we see a sustained pattern of Londoners carrying out global atrocities in the name of London - then yes, of course it would fall to Londoners themselves to speak out and definitively show this is not representitive of Londoners. So I hope we are clear on this.

If Moslems really did object to yesterdays events then, by virtue of the fact that it was carried out in the name of their deeply held faith means that it is their duty to ensure they speak out loud enough to ensure that it isn't. Moslems simply have to accept that a plausible interpretation of their faith gave rise to what happened yesterday, and given the scale of what we are seeing globally means the responsibility falls to them to show the world that such actions have no support from the mainstream. This may seem unfair but this is how it works unless they wish to be tarred with the same brush and so the simple fact is that it is not my duty to show the world what Moslems are about but the Moslems themselves. That this doesn't happen, yet they will organise a protest of rage at said cartoons or against Israel double quick is interesting and more than a bit telling.

See, by using your own criteria of non association we must then ask what exactly does the events involving Israel have to do with Moslems the world over? Everytime Israel does something Moslems do not like we see displays of Moslem mobilisation and solidarity with the Palestinians worldwide, we get the same with these cartoons - why is it that they suddenly feel the need to show the strength of their Moslem identity, to cvome out fighting for the name of their religion and show the world their deep loyalty to their co-religionists (in the case of Israel, over issues that 'technically' have absolutely nothing to do with them)??? Ahhhh - is it because their religion has been brought into this perhaps?? Well then, given this reality and the consistent leaping to defence of their faiths means I have to ask how on Earth you can then argue to the contrary and say yesterday has nothing to do with Moslems???

Curiously enough, all this solidarity and offence taking goes right out of the window when Islam is dragged through the mud in the way that it was yesterday so sadly it becomes blatantly obvious to me that Moslems have a hierarchical approach to what they react to, which propels them to coalesce when they encounter something they don't like - and rather disgracefully the death of Westerners in the name of their faith isn't one of them.

I find that unpardonable and must be pointed out. Sorry.

 

[Chev Chelios]

Now........ leave your prejudice to one side and think.
1. Conspiracy to Terrorise and murder is dreadful and unacceptable.
Just digest that.
2. Stretching freedom of expression to deliberately upset minorities (that includes you, probably) is not decent.

See? Easy! But it's only easy if you are not prejudiced, and I think that you are.
Further, your posts are nasty and insulting.

Prejudice? It doesn't take long for those that run out of arguments to revert to their default setting of the smear. So, please do explain how and what I am prejudice against.

As for deliberately going out of their way to offend minorities, well, this is another ridiculous statement - so who are deliberately going out to offend? And what exactly has the idea of minorities got to do with this? So, can I take it offending majorities is ok with you then? Why make a distinction? That has a whiff of prejudice thinking about it! And I must ask- how does1.6 billion people, possibly the biggest followers of a religion on the planet, constitue a minority exactly anyway? You need to broaden your worldview for this topic goes beyond the boundaries of Blighty. And as for me being a minority, well in terms of skin colour I suppose yes, I am, but I see myself as a part of this country and have never considered myself in these stupid divisive terms. I also must ask - did you feel the same way about **** Christ I ask? Or the constant mickey taking of Christianity? Should this be banned? It probably upsets Christians you know? Tell me, how even is your approach to this or is this all the debate is really about for you - the feelings of (a fictional) minority??

Now, for you to say what you just said shows the poor grasp of what you understand this debate to be all about for this has nothing to do with deliberately going out to hurt peoples feelings. This isn't some thought experiment created to test a response, the reponse to the cartoons has happened and many people have died - this makes the story of profound public interest, and given the threat - of deep deep importance to all of us - our traditions are being attacked and what is on display now is how we now react to this. Therefore the cartoons have to be shown. That they are not because of the threat being made means that we now have a situation which has far more at stake than 'feelings'. What is now being played against one another are diametrically opposing values of civilisations - and I take issue with the fact that our values of freedom should be submitting to codified Islamic restricions or else we will be upsetting peaceable Moslems and so we should pay the price.

The very idea you support is troubling and more than a bit dangerous so well done for your gelatinous moral constitution in supporting tyranny and in doing so you are giving weight to ideas which will drag our superior culture back in time and once backward steps have been taken we will likely find ourselves to be forever on the back foot (given what is happening here in England and the special treatment continually meted out to Moslems I think perfectly illustrates this point).

Anyway - excuse me if l take a more principled stance to this by holding to the belief that Western ideals are something worth fighting for and do not wish to live in a culture of fear and intimidation which has been backed up by a hair trigger response to violence everytime the followers of a faith feel 'offended'. You know something - that offends me.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

WHat command you talking about ?

agan التقية mean "lie" ? or what ?

Yes!
Tekkeislying
(Keep right, Worcester

)

Believe it, wemkatmh and leave their demonstration, followed by damage on religion and life

 

[oldbadger]

Prejudice? It doesn't take long for those that run out of arguments to revert to their default setting of the smear. So, please do explain how and what I am prejudice against.

As for deliberately going out of their way to offend minorities, well, this is another ridiculous statement - so who are deliberately going out to offend? And what exactly has the idea of minorities got to do with this? So, can I take it offending majorities is ok with you then? Why make a distinction? That has a whiff of prejudice thinking about it! And I must ask- how does1.6 billion people, possibly the biggest followers of a religion on the planet, constitue a minority exactly anyway? You need to broaden your worldview for this topic goes beyond the boundaries of Blighty. And as for me being a minority, well in terms of skin colour I suppose yes, I am, but I see myself as a part of this country and have never considered myself in these stupid divisive terms. I also must ask - did you feel the same way about **** Christ I ask? Or the constant mickey taking of Christianity? Should this be banned? It probably upsets Christians you know? Tell me, how even is your approach to this or is this all the debate is really about for you - the feelings of (a fictional) minority??

Now, for you to say what you just said shows the poor grasp of what you understand this debate to be all about for this has nothing to do with deliberately going out to hurt peoples feelings. This isn't some thought experiment created to test a response, the reponse to the cartoons has happened and many people have died - this makes the story of profound public interest, and given the threat - of deep deep importance to all of us - our traditions are being attacked and what is on display now is how we now react to this. Therefore the cartoons have to be shown. That they are not because of the threat being made means that we now have a situation which has far more at stake than 'feelings'. What is now being played against one another are diametrically opposing values of civilisations - and I take issue with the fact that our values of freedom should be submitting to codified Islamic restricions or else we will be upsetting peaceable Moslems and so we should pay the price.

The very idea you support is troubling and more than a bit dangerous so well done for your gelatinous moral constitution in supporting tyranny and in doing so you are giving weight to ideas which will drag our superior culture back in time and once backward steps have been taken we will likely find ourselves to be forever on the back foot (given what is happening here in England and the special treatment continually meted out to Moslems I think perfectly illustrates this point).

Anyway - excuse me if l take a more principled stance to this by holding to the belief that Western ideals are something worth fighting for and do not wish to live in a culture of fear and intimidation which has been backed up by a hair trigger response to violence everytime the followers of a faith feel 'offended'. You know something - that offends me.

Another rant.
TLDR.
Snore.......

 

[Godobeyer]

Yes!
Tekkeislying
(Keep right, Worcester

)

Believe it, wemkatmh and leave their demonstration, followed by damage on religion and life

you said had relate with mosque command right ? have you evidence (argument ) for what you claim ?

 

[Chev Chelios]

Another rant.
TLDR.
Snore.......

Just as expected - nothing to come back with that resembles reason or debate - just sheer juvenality. Quite why you are on a debate forum is beyond me - see, it is sort of the point - discussion and debate. But of course - you actually don't have any point which explains why you make snide remarks before sloping off like a weasel.

 

[Chev Chelios]

Here is your peaceful example of a Moslem that you specifically selected to show how Moslems speak out against tyranny.

I hand you over to Ashgar Bukhari's takei on Charlie Ebdo (having seen the full broadcast I must say that even this is terribly edited to show Asghar in a good light - I will seek out the original broadcast when it is posted)

 

[oldbadger]

Just as expected - nothing to come back with that resembles reason or debate - just sheer juvenality. Quite why you are on a debate forum is beyond me - see, it is sort of the point - discussion and debate. But of course - you actually don't have any point which explains why you make snide remarks before sloping off like a weasel.

Another Rant.
Snore........... zzzzzzzzzzzzz......

 

[Chev Chelios]

Another Rant.
Snore........... zzzzzzzzzzzzz......

I suggest you stick to topics in which you are not out of your depth. I am embarrassed for you.

 

[oldbadger]

I suggest you stick to topics in which you are not out of your depth. I am embarrassed for you.

............................ zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

What right to you is wrong to some others, for example it is right for you to eat beef whereas it is wrong for the Hindus.

And murder for drawing a cartoon is wrong for me, whereas for others it is right!

 

[FearGod]

And murder for drawing a cartoon is wrong for me, whereas for others it is right!

Exactly, and some see that the American assault on Iraq is wrong, whereas for others it is right.